E-E-A-T isn’t a ranking factor. It’s a framework Google uses to evaluate whether content deserves to rank.
This distinction matters more than it might seem. You can’t optimize for E-E-A-T the way you optimize for page speed or mobile-friendliness. There’s no E-E-A-T score in any API. Instead, E-E-A-T describes qualities that Google’s ranking systems attempt to identify and reward through hundreds of signals working together.
A Nashville healthcare content publisher spent six months trying to “improve their E-E-A-T score” before realizing no such score exists. Once they shifted focus to demonstrating genuine expertise through specific signals, their medical content started recovering from a helpful content update hit.
This guide explains what each component means, how Google evaluates them, and what practical steps actually move the needle.
What E-E-A-T Actually Is
E-E-A-T comes from Google’s Search Quality Rater Guidelines, a document Google gives to human evaluators who assess search result quality. These raters don’t directly influence rankings; they help Google calibrate whether its algorithms are surfacing appropriate content.
The framework evaluates content quality across four dimensions:
Experience refers to first-hand involvement with the topic. Did the author actually use the product, visit the location, or go through the process they’re describing?
Expertise means deep knowledge of the subject matter. Does the author demonstrate comprehensive understanding beyond surface-level information?
Authoritativeness indicates recognized standing in the field. Do other experts and authoritative sources reference this person or organization?
Trustworthiness encompasses accuracy, honesty, and safety. Can users rely on the information being true, transparent, and not harmful?
| Component | Question It Answers | Primary Signals |
|---|---|---|
| Experience | Has the author done this? | First-person accounts, specific details, photos, timelines |
| Expertise | Does the author know this deeply? | Credentials, depth of explanation, accuracy |
| Authoritativeness | Is the author recognized for this? | Citations, mentions, backlinks from authorities |
| Trustworthiness | Can users rely on this? | Accuracy, transparency, security, reputation |
Google has explicitly stated that trustworthiness is the most important component. Content can demonstrate expertise without being trustworthy (think misleading financial advice from a qualified advisor), and that’s worse than inexpert content that’s honestly labeled as such.
Experience: The Newest Component
Google added the first “E” for experience in December 2022, acknowledging that first-hand knowledge provides value algorithms might otherwise miss.
Consider two articles about recovering from knee surgery. One comes from a medical professional explaining the clinical process. The other comes from someone who went through the surgery documenting their six-month recovery journey. Both have value. The clinical article demonstrates expertise; the patient article demonstrates experience.
Signals that communicate experience:
- First-person narrative and personal observations
- Specific details only someone present would know
- Original photos and documentation
- Timelines showing ongoing involvement
- Honest discussion of difficulties and challenges
Experience signals matter most for review content, travel recommendations, how-to content for processes the author completed, and any situation where “I did this” adds credibility that “I researched this” doesn’t.
For some topics, experience trumps formal expertise. A 20-year mechanic who never got formal certification may offer more valuable repair advice than someone who studied automotive theory but rarely works on actual cars.
That said, experience without expertise can be misleading. Someone’s personal recovery from cancer doesn’t qualify them to give medical advice. Experience provides perspective; it doesn’t replace professional knowledge for technical topics.
Expertise: Demonstrating Deep Knowledge
Expertise signals tell Google that content comes from someone who genuinely understands the subject, not someone who just researched it quickly to write an article.
How expertise manifests in content:
- Accurate, current information that matches expert consensus
- Appropriate use of technical terminology (correctly, not as keyword stuffing)
- Awareness of nuance, exceptions, and edge cases
- Depth beyond what superficial research would produce
- Correct answers to questions an expert would expect readers to ask
How expertise manifests in author signals:
- Relevant credentials (degrees, certifications, professional roles)
- Employment or affiliation with recognized organizations
- Publication history in the subject area
- Speaking engagements, teaching positions, advisory roles
- Verifiable track record in the field
For YMYL topics (health, finance, legal, safety), expertise signals carry substantially more weight. Google explicitly looks for content created or reviewed by qualified professionals when the information could impact health, financial stability, or safety.
A Nashville financial planning firm learned this when their blog content written by marketing staff consistently underperformed compared to articles their CFP-credentialed advisors wrote. The content quality wasn’t dramatically different, but author signals made a measurable ranking difference.
Building expertise signals without formal credentials:
Not every legitimate expert has degrees or certifications. Demonstrate expertise through:
- Detailed case studies from your actual work
- In-depth tutorials showing advanced knowledge
- Original research or data analysis
- Consistent accuracy over a body of work
- Recognition from credentialed experts in your space
Authoritativeness: Being Recognized
Expertise is what you know. Authoritativeness is whether others recognize that you know it.
This component functions somewhat like PageRank applied to reputation rather than links. An authority is someone or something that other authorities recognize as a legitimate source.
Signals that build authoritativeness:
- Backlinks from recognized authorities in your field
- Mentions and citations from reputable sources
- Guest contributions to authoritative publications
- Wikipedia citations (not a guarantee, but a positive signal)
- Featured in mainstream media or industry publications
- Awards and recognition from professional organizations
The authority flows both directions. A site with strong domain authority can lend authority to its authors. An author with strong personal authority can elevate a newer site’s perceived authority.
For most sites, building authoritativeness is the slowest E-E-A-T component to develop. It requires external validation that you can’t create unilaterally. You can improve expertise signals through better content. You can demonstrate experience through documented first-hand accounts. But authoritativeness requires others to recognize and reference you.
Practical approaches:
- Create research or data others want to cite
- Contribute valuable expertise to industry discussions
- Build relationships with recognized authorities
- Develop unique frameworks or methodologies others adopt
- Pursue industry recognition legitimately (not purchased awards)
Trustworthiness: The Foundation
Google’s guidelines emphasize trustworthiness as the core of E-E-A-T. An untrustworthy source, regardless of how expert or experienced, provides negative value.
Trustworthiness encompasses several sub-dimensions:
Accuracy. Is the information factually correct? Are claims supported by evidence? Does the content acknowledge uncertainty where appropriate?
Transparency. Is authorship clear? Does the site explain who’s responsible for content? Are commercial relationships disclosed?
Security. Does the site protect user data? Is it technically secure (HTTPS, no malware)?
Reputation. What do external sources say about the site/author? Do reviews and references paint a trustworthy picture?
| Trust Signal | Where It's Evaluated |
|---|---|
| Contact information | About page, footer |
| Business legitimacy | Company details, registrations |
| Author identification | Bylines, author pages |
| Editorial standards | Corrections policy, review process |
| Secure connection | HTTPS implementation |
| Privacy practices | Privacy policy, data handling |
| Content accuracy | Factual correctness, current information |
Red flags that undermine trustworthiness:
- Anonymous content on topics requiring accountability
- Missing or fake contact information
- No correction or update policy
- Contradictory information within the site
- Deceptive practices (hidden ads, misleading claims)
- Known inaccuracies left uncorrected
E-E-A-T Requirements Vary by Content Type
A hobbyist blog about gardening faces different E-E-A-T expectations than a site providing medical diagnoses or financial advice. Google applies stricter evaluation to content that could harm users if wrong.
YMYL (Your Money or Your Life) content covers topics where poor information could damage health, financial stability, safety, or well-being. This includes:
- Medical and health information
- Financial advice and services
- Legal information
- News about important current events
- Safety information
- Content affecting major life decisions
For YMYL topics, Google expects clear expertise credentials, thorough sourcing, regular updates, and professional accountability. An anonymous health article with no author credentials faces a nearly insurmountable E-E-A-T barrier.
Non-YMYL content has more flexibility. A cookie recipe doesn’t need medical credentials. An opinion piece about movie preferences doesn’t require journalism degrees. The E-E-A-T bar scales to potential harm.
That said, even casual content benefits from E-E-A-T signals. A recipe from someone with evident cooking experience and clearly tested results will generally outperform one that feels AI-generated or assembled without actual kitchen time.
Improving E-E-A-T Signals Practically
E-E-A-T improvement isn’t a one-time project. It’s an ongoing commitment to building and demonstrating genuine quality.
For experience signals:
- Document your actual involvement with topics you cover
- Include specific details that prove first-hand knowledge
- Add original photos, timelines, and progress documentation
- Share both successes and difficulties honestly
- Update content as your experience continues
For expertise signals:
- Feature author credentials prominently on author pages
- Create detailed author bios linking to external verification
- Demonstrate knowledge depth through comprehensive coverage
- Show awareness of nuance and complexity
- Cite authoritative sources appropriately
For authoritativeness signals:
- Create cite-worthy original research or resources
- Build relationships with recognized authorities
- Pursue legitimate industry recognition
- Guest contribute to respected publications
- Develop unique intellectual property others reference
For trustworthiness signals:
- Maintain clear, accessible contact information
- Implement comprehensive about pages
- Establish and follow editorial standards
- Create and follow correction policies
- Ensure technical security (HTTPS, no vulnerabilities)
- Disclose commercial relationships transparently
Measuring E-E-A-T Progress
No direct E-E-A-T metric exists, but proxy indicators can suggest whether your signals are improving.
Watch for:
- Ranking improvements on YMYL queries (if applicable)
- Recovery from helpful content or core updates
- Increased citations and mentions from authoritative sources
- Growing backlink profile from relevant, respected sites
- Featured snippet and knowledge panel appearances
- User engagement improvements (if trust was a bounce factor)
Red flags that signals may be weak:
- Consistent underperformance on topics you should rank for
- Poor performance relative to similar-authority competitors
- Helpful content update visibility losses
- Low rankings despite technically optimized content
Progress typically shows over months, not days. E-E-A-T signals build gradually through sustained effort, not quick fixes.
What E-E-A-T Isn’t
Understanding common misconceptions helps focus efforts appropriately.
E-E-A-T isn’t a direct ranking factor. You can’t “add E-E-A-T” like you add schema markup. Google’s algorithms use many signals to assess qualities E-E-A-T describes, but there’s no E-E-A-T algorithm.
E-E-A-T doesn’t mean you need credentials for everything. An experienced home cook can have excellent culinary E-E-A-T. A longtime gardener can outrank university extension services for practical advice. Credentials matter most for YMYL topics.
E-E-A-T can’t be faked with author bios. Adding impressive-sounding bios to content that lacks actual expertise signals doesn’t work. Google evaluates the content itself, not just the claimed credentials.
E-E-A-T isn’t quick to fix. Sites hoping to recover from quality updates by adding author pages often find that insufficient. Building genuine E-E-A-T signals takes time, not just technical implementation.
The sites that succeed with E-E-A-T are those that genuinely embody these qualities rather than those that attempt to signal qualities they lack.
Sources
- Google Search Quality Rater Guidelines
- Google Search Central: Creating helpful, reliable, people-first content
https://developers.google.com/search/docs/fundamentals/creating-helpful-content
- Google Blog: What creators should know about Google’s helpful content system
https://developers.google.com/search/blog/2022/08/helpful-content-update
Note: E-E-A-T guidance reflects Google’s documented frameworks as of early 2025. Evaluation criteria evolve with algorithm updates and guideline revisions.